الفهرس 
Lateral Decubitus PositionOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 73 |  |  |
| | | from | 73 | | |
Abstract
Background: The treatment of rotator cuff pathology has evolved with an improved understanding of rotator cuff anatomy, more sophisticated instrumentation, and advances in surgical technique. The most effective method of surgical repair is controversial given that both arthroscopic and mini-open rotator cuff repairs have been shown to produce satisfactory clinical results.
Aim of the Work: Compare between the outcomes of two techniques arthroscopic versus mini-open rotator cuff repair regarding functional outcome, postoperative complications.
Patients and Methods: This study is a Randomized control trials (RCT), and studies with level evidence 1 and Duration of follow up equal or more than 6 months. The systematic literature review was performed following the preferred items for systematic reviews meta-analysis (PRISMA) guided items and check list.
Results: Studies was pooled and reported ASES score showed insignificant difference between the two groups. We revealed that the pooled results showed statistically significant difference regarding clinical outcomes ROM (External Rotation) between groups. The pooled results showed no statistically significant difference regarding clinical outcomes forward flexion and pain score between groups and. studies were pooled to compare complication between arthroscopic repair with minor open repair. Results showed insignificant difference between the two groups.
Conclusion: The effects of arthroscopic compared to mini-open rotator cuff repair, on function, pain and range of motion are too small to be clinically important at 3-, 6- and 12-month follow up, So the surgical choice should depend on the surgeon experience, and how much the aesthetic factor means to the patient.